La linguistique panchronique nécessaire à la linguistique comparée, science auxiliaire de la diachronie sociologique et ethnographique [Panchronic linguistics necessary to comparative linguistics as an auxiliary science of sociological and anthropological diachrony

Abstract

By reference to Buhler's triangle distinguishing those aspects of linguistic activity deriving from intellectual communication from sociological and psychological aspects, the author argues that, in the sphere of diachronic phonology, structuralism is an inadequate method with which to account for phonetic changes within languages. For the speaker, speech is limited essentially to the meaning of what he says, and the sounds used are merely a social or psychological aspect which can be considered as a localized or phonetic feature. To isolate this sound in the phonological sense, that is to define its relevant characteristics, demands recourse to abstraction, as well as to sociology and history since the functioning of the structure of a language has been ensured by social pressures and by the social prestige of neighbouring languages. It is impossible to confine oneself to a purely synchronic viewpoint since every society contains at least one element of potential diachronism. Conversely, linguistic laws prevent one from becoming obnubilated with exceptions related to sociological causes. Phonic changes, for example, can be very commonplace, and occur, in the majority of cases, within a determined structure : however, if, within this same structure, changes of this kind are very rare, it is likely that they result from some external influence of social origin. It is then the function of general theory, based upon the examination of as large a number of known languages as possible, to settle the issue.